Fuzzy Logic (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message

candystripper -> Fuzzy Logic (7/3/2008 9:57:38 PM)

All of us -- myself included -- have been guilty of 'fuzzy logic' in some of our posts.  I thought a discussion of logic and some links to source material might be of interest.
 
Logic is 'a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration -- the science of the formal principles of reasoning'.
 
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/logic
 
Logic is 'the study of the principles of correct reasoning'.
 
http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/logic/whatislogic.php
 
You can make your arguments stronger by:
 
  1. quote:

    using good premises (ones you have good reason to believe are both true and relevant to the issue at hand),
  2. making sure your premises provide good support for your conclusion (and not some other conclusion, or no conclusion at all),
  3. checking that you have addressed the most important or relevant aspects of the issue (that is, that your premises and conclusion focus on what is really important to the issue you're arguing about), and
  4. not making claims that are so strong or sweeping that you can't really support them.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
 
A logical fallacy is 'a defect that weakens argument'. 
 
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
 
One example of a logical fallacy is the 'ad hominem' or against the speaker attack:
 
quote:

"Andrea Dworkin has written several books arguing that pornography harms women. But Dworkin is an ugly, bitter person, so you shouldn't listen to her."
 
Dworkin's appearance and character, which the arguer has characterized so ungenerously, have nothing to do with the strength of her argument, so using them as evidence is fallacious.


http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
 
There are many logical fallacies.

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html
 
The list includes hasty generalisations, missing the point, post hoc or false cause, slippery slope, weak analogy, appeal to authority, ad populum or the desire to be liked, appeal to pity, appeal to ignorance, straw man, red herring, false dichotomy, begging the question, etc.
 
These are all discussed, and examples given, at the following link:
 
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html
 
Here's a link for the basics of logic and debate:
 
http://www.ninjapirate.com/logic.html
 
candystripper
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



fluffyswitch -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/3/2008 10:00:14 PM)

respectfully is there a point to this thread that i'm missing or is this just another response to something that was said to you in another thread?



candystripper -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/3/2008 10:25:40 PM)

Fluffy, would that be an 'ad hominem' attack or 'missing the point'?

My 'motive' for posting the Op was stated:

quote:

All of us -- myself included -- have been guilty of 'fuzzy logic' in some of our posts.  I thought a discussion of logic and some links to source material might be of interest....
 
candystripper

 
I really don't know what I can add.  Either you place a value on logic and critical thinking or you don't.
 
candystripper



fluffyswitch -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/3/2008 10:32:42 PM)

i was missing the point. your original post was not clear at least not when i first read it-- hence the respectfully part of my post, and you had a quote from a different thread in the original post, furthering my confusion.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/3/2008 10:34:55 PM)

Candy cannot uphold any sensible discussion for more than five seconds at a time so she places all efforts into making the best appearance possible of being sensible, oblivious to the fact that all her attempts manage to highlight her lack of sensibility rather than shadow.



ResidentSadist -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 3:08:22 AM)

Damn… I am broken hearted and disappointed.  I thought this was going to be about fuzzy logic.  “Fuzzy logic” has to do with more than two truth values in dirivitive sets.  It is based on “fuzzy set theory” which permits the gradual assessment of the membership of elements in a set.

I am really at a loss in this one… what do “fallacies”, “how to argue” or the other links you provided have to do with fuzzy logic?  Not one of your links contains anything about fuzzy logic or even mentions it once.  They also don’t have anything to do with control theory or the other applications of fuzzy logic.

I almost didn't post in this thread because like so many other times, I figured you would say "the OP wasn't about me" only in this case you are going to tell us it isn't about "fuzzy logic".

Ok… so let’s say this thread is not about fuzzy logic despite the title and quotes in your writings.  It is “discussion of logic” as you say and links are to “source material”.  Once again, your links contain nothing about logic, the science or application of logic except the dictionary definition you provided. 

All these links are about arguing and fallacy.  After seeing your other posts and as exemplified by this post, I can understand your interest in fallacy (deceptive, misleading, or false notion) and arguing.  This post is a perfect example of a misleading title with deceptive writing.   Well done, you get no argument from me about that. 

Fuzzy logic…  seems more like a fuzzy post to me.  Would you care to clear it up for us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the interest of harmony and to spare the mods overtime from your reports about our flaming replies to your threads, I tell you it truly is hard to reply to something as unclear as your OP.  With that sincere intent in mind I ask:
1. What is the real point of your OP since this has nothing to with a “discussion of logic?”
2. Why did you call it fuzzy logic or what does logic mean to you so we can at least understand your intent in the use of the words?
3. What did you hope the links about arguing and fallacy would do for us or this thread?

If you clearly answer those questions I bet the mods wont be spending another afternoon deleting replies and mopping up the forums after you again.



softness -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 3:39:19 AM)

groans .... who let her get hold of the rhetorical devices dictionary

there will be no end to it now



N4SDChastity -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 5:43:30 AM)

you guys make me LoL - OUT LOUD!



Aileen1968 -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 6:11:30 AM)

I thought it was a rice cooker.



odioustoad -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 6:28:38 AM)

i gots nuttin fuzzy or logical to add
*wanders back to forum oblivion*



wandersalone -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 6:42:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

I thought it was a rice cooker.

I am with Aileen....wasn't there a thread about fuzzy logic being a rice cooker the other day?  Damn you people confuse me.



Aileen1968 -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 7:01:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wandersalone

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

I thought it was a rice cooker.  <~~~~~  LINKY

I am with Aileen....wasn't there a thread about fuzzy logic being a rice cooker the other day?  Damn you people confuse me.




thornhappy -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 8:23:36 AM)

(fast reply)

Being the Resident Nerd (with Fluffy Bosoms), I too was hoping for a discussion on fuzzy logic (as ResidentSadist mentioned.)

* sigh *

thornhappy



Strongmindbody -> RE: Fuzzy Logic (7/4/2008 9:31:52 AM)

Also disappointed in the lack of fzy logic discussion. But to try to address what might have been something buried in the OP:

I don't see this board as a vehicle for debate. I see it as a place for discussion, learning, growing, sharing, community, what have you.

Debate implies irreconcilable differences defended against all comers with the expectation that somebody wins and somebody loses. Not what I'm here for. Yeah, I know, threads can get out of hand sometimes, but this is the internet, for cryin' out loud!

But I do like the subject line, because it made me realize that BDSM boards have NOTHING to do with logic, fuzzy or otherwise. Now, a DBMS board? That might be another story...



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125